In Wegman v. U.S. Specialty Sports Ass’n, Inc., No. 6:23-cv-1637-RBD-RMN (M.D. Fla. Dec. 12, 2023), Florida Magistrate Judge Robert M. Norway ruled that defendant Donald Dedonatis III must turn over three electronic devices in his possession to defendant USSSA within three days and pay reasonable expenses associated with the motion.

Judge’s Ruling

In this case, Judge Norway began his ruling by stating: “Few things are certain in life or litigation. But given the representations made by his counsel at recent hearing, DeDonatis could bet dollars to donuts that he has no choice but to turn over three electronic devices in his possession that belong to The United States Specialty Sports Association, Inc. (“USSSA”). At that hearing, counsel for DeDonatis conceded that the devices are USSSA’s property…For this and other reasons, the Court denied a motion filed by DeDonatis that sought a court order authorizing him to create forensic copies of the devices before returning them to USSSA.”

Judge Norway continued, stating: “As was apparent to every participant at that hearing, all persons who anticipate or are parties to litigation have a duty to locate, retain, and preserve potentially relevant evidence, including electronically stored information…The Court need not dwell too long on that requirement here, as USSSA and DeDonatis both acknowledge they have an obligation to preserve evidence contained on the devices.”

Judge Norway also stated: “The devices belong to USSSA…The organization concedes it must preserve the evidence on the devices,…and it intends to make forensic copies of the devices once they are returned so it can comply with its preservation obligations…DeDonatis’ retention of USSSA’s property prevents the organization from fulfilling its duty to preserve evidence, thereby prejudicing it.”

Elaborating, Judge Norway stated: “The organization is prejudiced by the failure to return the devices in another way too. Organizations know what their employees know…DeDonatis was once USSSA’s chief executive officer…Given that he is now on administrative leave and his relationship with USSSA has soured, the devices contain evidence that the organization needs to determine what DeDonatis knows, when he learned about it, what he did about it, and who was involved.”

Concluding his analysis, Judge Norway stated: “In short, DeDonatis’ failure to return the USSSA’s devices frustrates the organization’s collection efforts, stymies its investigation into the events that form the basis of Plaintiffs’ claims, and thwarts the preparation of the organization’s defenses. DeDonatis must return the devices to USSSA immediately.”

As a result, Judge Norway ruled that Dedonatis must turn over three electronic devices to defendant USSSA by stating the following:

“Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. Defendant The United States Specialty Sports Association, Inc.’s Short-Form Motion to Compel Defendant DeDonatis to Return Property, Enjoin Copying, and For Fees/Costs (Dkt. 98) is GRANTED;
2. DeDonatis is directed to return all electronic devices provided to him by Defendant The United States Specialty Sports Association, Inc. no later than December 15, 2023;
3. DeDonatis shall not access, copy, or otherwise tamper with any electronically stored information contained on the devices; and
4. USSSA is awarded reasonable expenses. The parties shall confer regarding the expenses that it necessarily incurred prosecuting the motion. If the parties cannot agree on an amount, USSSA shall file a single motion claiming the amount of all fees and expenses due at the end of the discovery period. Such motion is subject to the requirements of Local Rule 3.01(a), including (but not limited to) the 25-page limit for motions.”

So, what do you think? Can one defendant be responsible for preservation of its devices if another defendant fails to turn them over? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Case opinion link courtesy of eDiscovery Assistant, an Affinity partner of eDiscovery Today.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.